Water is the most basic necessity for human life to survive on this planet.

The quality of water

represents the level of hazard being posed to human beings. Additionally, the state of water
also represents the degree of hazard being subjected to the biological life already existing in
the water body. However, Humans utilise the water for their own benefits but tend to decrease
the water quality in return. Thus, thrust should be on observation and administration of water
resources for their effective management. Different Models help to create various scenario
analysis for the effective administration of the water resources at the watershed level.
We must accept that the carrying capacity of the streams and that the nature has its own
limitation. Using all innovative apparatuses to plan proficient control and treatment gadgets
that are designed according to the characteristic procedure that have since from a long time
have protected our biosphere. By Bringing the innovation into agreement with the regular
habitat, We can achieve our goal of sustainable development.

1.3. Description of study area

As depicted in Figure 1.2., Ganga River from Bhimgauda barrage (Haridwar) to Garhmukteshwar has been considered for the
study. This study area has catchment area of 5690 sq. km. Salient features of study stretch of river Ganga is presented in Table
No. 1.2.

Table 1.2. Salient Features of Study Stretch of River Ganga

The Study Stretch Coordinates North Latitudes 29° 57’ to 28° 46’
East Longitude 78° 10’ to 78°08’
Stream Length 160 km
Catchment area 5690 sq. km
Barrage in study stretch Bhimgauda barrage and Bijnor Barrage
Distance Bhimgauda to Bijnor barrage 82 km
 Figure 1.2:Location of Study Stretch

The river Ganges enters the Great Plains after Haridwar. Initially, The river bed is comprised of cobbles and gravels which
later on get reduced to fine silt and sand. Water is diverted at two places namely, The Bhimgauda Barrage (Haridwar) and
Bijnor Barrage (Bijnor) which is used to support the agricultural practices of the plains. The river inundates it's flood plains
during the monsoon period due to very high discharge of flow. Biodiversity thrives in between the stretch with the presence of
crocodiles, ghariyals, turtles and fishes.
Various drains join the river Ganga from the downstream of Haridwar. Figure 1.3 depicts the major drains coming in the
catchment area and the line diagram presented shows the catchment area of respective drains. The location of various drains
in the catchment is shown in Figure 1.4. For better analysis, land use map (Figure 1.5) is been prepared and regarding elevation
details a digital elevation model (DEM) map ( Figure 1.6) is also shown.

Figure 1.3:River Network Line Diagram[43]

1.5. Water Quality Model Use

To identify water unfit for usage a system of monitoring network should be preferred. However, this does not exclude
predictions based on models. Simulations from model may be used for in addition with or instead of monitoring data for two
reasons:
[1] In some situation modelling should be used where monitoring may not be feasible,

[2] Combined modelling along with monitoring systems can prove a better solution rather than modelling/monitoring alone
for the equivalent cost.
Combined runoff and water quality prediction models follow cause and effect relationship. Link Stressors (pollutants sources
and pollution caused by them) are of two types direct stressors include human interference like impairment to water bodies by
causing untreated discharge into the streams/rivers, Constructing dams/works which cause stream flows to affect, over
harvesting of river fishes, impervious land cover which affects groundwater flow and also adds to pollutants to nearby stream
and cultivation on flood plains will cause release of pollutants into the river directly. Aberrant impressions of people
incorporate land use changes that modify the conveyance rates for water, contaminants, and silt/sediment to water bodies.

Some of the main effects of indirect and direct activities of human interference results in five main varieties of stressors:

• Changes in physical surrounding,

• Changes in the seasonal flow of water,

• Changes in the food intake of the system,

• Changes in reactions involved within the stream biota, and

• Release of conventional pollutants within the system

Ideally, The models should be designed on these parameters for the assessment of alternatives based on these five features.
The approach featuring these five features may provides a more lucrative platform to check or to reduce the causes of pollution.

A variety of quantitative models can be employed for predictions regarding transport of pollutants and their fate from Point
and Non-Point Sources, Estimation of assimilative capacity and the efficiency of relative best management practices.

1.6.Assimilation Capacity of Rivers

The assimilative capacity of an ecosystem receiving pollution can be defined as the ability “to

receive a determined level of residues, to degrade them and to convert them in non damaging
and even beneficial products”.
The concentration of dissolved oxygen is an essential parameter for maintaining the stream's integrity and ecological health.
If wastewater with substantial amount of organic matter are added into the river this affects the assimilation capacity of the
streams.(Kaushik.K.,2015).
A poor assimilation capacity is a direct result of degree of treatment provided, quality of effluent discharged from the plant,
type of sewer network whose outcome has a direct bearing on river's ecology, quality of groundwater, recreation activities etc.
which indirectly control human health. (Chaudhary, M., 2014).
So, Apart from the regular water quality monitoring, emphasis should be laid on assessment of the threshold assimilation
capacities of the streams and load allocation as well as load management in such a manner that the regenerative capacity of
the water body should be restored.
CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW

Water Quality Models are the mathematical tools which provide techniques for evaluation of alternatives which is an important
step to protect lakes and rivers by permits issued for waste load allocation (Thomann and Mueller 1987; Chapra 1997).
Adversely impacted ecosystems along with limiting usage of water bodies for bathing, irrigation, recreational activities,
drinking water supply and other purposes are some of the adverse effects on water bodies which receive contamination from
wastewater (Alexander et al. 1992; Ouattara et al. 2014; Sinclair et al. 2009).

In economic terms, the value associated with water required for assimilation with the waste can be estimated in terms of cost
of treatment involved or the damages avoided downstream (Gibbons 1986).

2.1. Natural D.O. Model

Quick estimation for pollution travel time along the river has been carried out by Jobson (1997).Whereas A Method based
upon Non-Linear Regression, Geometry and Hydraulic data of the River for estimation of Dispersion Coefficients for
Reaeration along the stretch has been carried out by Seo and Cheong (1998).

Streeter and Phelps (1925) present a very detailed discussion of the techniques used in applying this equation to the analysis
of the Ohio River. The basic premise of this model is that the oxygen consumed in any time period is proportional to the total
oxygen yet to be consumed as the system attains stability.

The Streeter-Phelps equation, which employs first order kinetics to express deoxygenation and reoxygenation, was the first
sag curve predictor equation developed. This model predicts changes in the deficit as a function of BOD exertion and stream
reaeration.
=( − ) − − − + −
.....(1)

Where,

L0 = ultimate BOD in the water at t = 0

D0 = deficit at t = 0.

Note that both L0 and D0 are the values in the stream after any external waste streams have been mixed in.

This equation is known as the DO sag equation (for its distinctive shape) or the Streeter-Phelps equation, after the gentlemen
who first published it in 1925.

For this application the value of kd was assumed to be 0.23 (0.1 in common logs). This value represents the average value of
the results of many BOD tests of waste waters which were not related to the study. The values of D and Do were measured in
the stream. The value of Lo was determined by the BOD test. The values of Lo at the boundary stations of the stretch of stream
being considered were determined and an averaging technique was used to obtain a single value to be inserted in the equation.
The value of kd in all BOD tests was assumed to be 0.23.

These field and laboratory measurements and assumptions resulted in the reoxygenation reaction constant, kr, being the only
undetermined variable in the equation. Thus, the equation could be used to determine the value of kr.

The values so determined were those which made the in situ measurements and the values for the deoxygenation process,
which consisted of both laboratory determined and postulated values, compatible. The preceding outlines one method whereby
Equation 1 can be used to analyze field data.

The extent to which Equation 1 can be made to fit the field data through the use of the method employed by Streeter and Phelps
is dependent on how well the postulated models represent the actual situation and the degree of compatibility between the
predicted values for the deoxygenation model and the values which prevailed in the stream. Again attention is directed to the
fact that the predicted values for deoxygenation are used whether the combined equation is being used for analysis or
prediction.
Thomas (1973) discussed a technique for stream analysis which recognizes that the kr value may not be 0.23 and also that
there may be BOD sinks other than that represented by bio-oxidation. Furthermore, his discussion indicates that he did not
consider these additional BOD sinks to be oxygen sinks. This technique requires that, through the use of the BOD test, the
values of kr and Lo be determined at the boundary stations of a hydraulically uniform stretch of stream. The difference between
the Lo values of the upstream and downstream stations represents the reduction in oxygen demand realized through the reach.
This information combined with the time of passage, and assuming first order kinetics, is used to determine the rate constant
expressing the reduction in potential oxygen consumption in the reach. The reaction constant for oxygen demand by the
biosphere is determined by averaging the kr values observed for samples from the two boundary stations. The difference
between this rate and that observed for the stream represents the rate at which potential oxygen demanding material is going
to non-oxygen consuming sinks. The determination of kd then is based on the value of kr (determined as indicated), the average
Lo value, the average deficit and the change in the deficit. The prospect of predicting kd was not considered. Although this
approach recognizes that kr may vary, it assumes, as does Equation 1, that the stream values of kr and Lo can be predicted from
bottle measurements and that such values can legitimately be used for field data analysis. The concept that not all potential
oxygen consumption need necessarily be satisfied by actual consumption was a significant contribution to stream analysis.
However, the method of determining kd is again such that kd is forced to assume values which make the predicted values for
deoxygenation and field data compatible.

O'Connor and Dobbins (1973) have considered additional sources and sinks of both oxygen and BOD, however, the resulting
equations have incorporated in them modified forms of the Streeter-Phelps Equation.

The data of Butterfield et. al. (1973) indicate that the oxygen demand occurs in stages; the first representing that being
consumed by bacterial respiration, the second representing the oxygen required to support the respiration of the secondary
consumers. This two-stage aspect results in a plateau which can be interpreted as being a result of the time required for the
secondary consumer to respond to the increased concentration of bacteria developed during the first stage. There is no apparent
reason to assume that the same type of transfer resistance could not be expected at the hydrosphere-biosphere interface.

Swilley et. al. (1973) have postulated about the importance of considering transport phenomena when dealing with bio-
systems. Kehrberger et. al.(1973) describe the response of nutrient uptake as the turbulence level in the system increases.
Within the constraints set, as the turbulence level increased, the nutrient uptake rate increased indicating that diffusion was
limiting transfer. This conclusion was further substantiated by considering changes in rates with increasing temperature at
different turbulent levels. This work supports the concept that a major resistance to hydrosphere-biosphere transport is a
stagnant boundary layer around the organisms.

Bennett and Kempe (1973) , however, working in a different type system found no change in the oxygen transfer rate from
hydrosphere to biosphere once the turbulence had increased beyond a certain threshold value. It is not apparent whether these
differences are real or whether they exist because the turbulence levels prevailing in the two systems were not adequately
defined. In any event it appears that stream turbulence will have some influence on oxygen uptake by the biosphere. The
various techniques developed by these investigators make it possible to determine kd independently of the in situ measurements
and the predicted values of deoxygenation by the biosphere. However, this independency also creates some problems in that
it is not possible, at least at present, to include in the resulting equations the effects which the chemical and biological
components of the hydrosphere, and the changes in such components with time, might have on atmospheric reoxygenation.

Tsivoglou et. al.(1973) have considered, on a laboratory scale, a technique for determining kd which reflects the influence of
the chemical and biological composition of the Hydrosphere on surface reoxygenation. Whether this technique will lead to
better methods for predicting kd has yet to be established. The values of independently determined kd values should, when
combined with deoxygenation values, predicted from laboratory studies, describe the oxygen sag curve for the conditions
considered. If the calculated values and the field data agree then it is assumed that models and the values of their constants do
in fact fairly represent the actual condition. However, if there is disagreement between the data and the calculations, then the
question arises as to which of the constants and/or models are applicable and which are not.
The resolution of such a discrepancy appears to be basically subjective in nature. It is apparent from the preceding
considerations of the techniques available for stream analysis, that the model assumed for expressing oxygen uptake by the
biosphere has tremendous impact on both the prediction of the sag curve and the determination of the values of the constants.
Phelps states that "There is, in fact, no real justification for holding that the rate of decrease of BOD is exactly monomolecular.
In practical applications it appears on extensive study to be so nearly monomolecular as to justify the use of our present
formulas. On the other hand, there are some facts suggesting that the monomolecular law does not exactly express the
situation." Thus, the problem is not whether or not the first order kinetic model is explicit in defining the reaction, but when
should it and when should it not be used, if in fact such a distinct division is necessary and/or possible.

It is generally understood, but sometimes ignored, that the BOD test measures the quantity of oxygen consumed by all the bio-
forms of a selected aquatic ecosystem when it is stimulated by an external food source. Theoretically this food source could
enter the system at any trophic level.

2.2.Multi-objective Optimization Models

Neural Network based Multi objective optimization for water quality management for the Tou-Chen River Basin in Taiwan
has been applied by Wen and Lee (1998).

Karoon-Dez river system in the southwest part of Iran has shown 300% increase in benefits for stakeholders resulting in a
increment for application of such model. The Model was based on game theory and presented load allocation for rivers. This
study was presented by Poorsepahy-Samian et al. (2012).

Gray and Fuzzy Programming has been used to minimise the risk involved with riverine pollution.( Chang et al. (1997)).

Karoon River in Iran has been subjected to water quality management developed on the lines of a sequential dynamic genetic
algorithm (SDGA) developed by Karamouz et al. (2003).

Regarding Pollution load allocation stochastic dynamic programming principle is been employed and a model based on
stochastic genetic algorithm (GA) is been presented by Kerachian et al. (2005).

2.3.Modelling Process and Decision support System

The process begins with the selection of a model and it's development. In the development phase, adequacy of model is
checked. Thus proper selection of a appropriate model plays an important role. Once the model is selected, Preliminary
development starts with the process of data collection and mining. Past observations and other historical data if required are
gathered. Model development begins, during which the data is projected to various assumptions and tests. Once the model
starts giving output it is then subjected to various calibration tests for its 'Tuning'. This follows steps for uncertainty and model
sensitivity. Lastly, Integration of the model with the D.S.S. (Decision Support System) for management and data driven
decision making are the ultimate goals for which modelling is done (Chapra 2003).
Data availability plays an important role in modelling. In initial phases, simpler models may be used but as the modelling
progresses for complex models additional data sets may be required for more complex problems (Gao, Guo, and Liu 2015).
In the context with the Indian scenario, the development of Decision Support System (D.S.S.) for managing water quality
issues has been a limited approach. Major reasons can be credited to application, adaptability, data availability and mechanism
of interface for different models (Babbar et al.2012).

2.4.Impact of untreated wastewater discharge

Meng (2009) analysed the present river pollution scenario in China. Large scale economic development, untreated waste water
and low control on Non-Point Sources were some major findings in this regard. Remedial measures included establishment of
pollution control systems at the catchment level, conducting risk assessment studies and preserving aquatic ecosystems along
with large scale protection works for water quality .
Optimization of water quality networks for the Heilongjiang River of North-East China has been achieved by Chen et al.
(2012). They identified that information of water quality and a network for monitoring play a vital role for achieving the best
management practices for water resources control for pollution.

Establishment of a permit compliance system by studying the response of receiving waters set under certain critical conditions.
Conservation of water quality is challenged at certain highly developed catchments where standards are violated, the
assimilative capacity of the river is exceeded and the limits of technological controls are reached (Effler et al. 2002).

Storm water sewers subjected to unregulated connections, overflows from the streets, leakages are some of the critical
problems faced in the urban watersheds (Pitt 2004; Schilperoort et al. 2013).
As per the National Water Quality Inventory (USEPA 2002) , 'Use Impairment' prevailed over, 41% for the rivers[e.g., Ohio
River (Cleary 1967) ] and 46% for the lakes[e.g., Lake Washington, Edmondson and Lehman ] assessed. In spite of knowledge
advancement in the areas of surface water and water treatment technology(Wetzel 2001). The inventory also gave an insight
for the causes of such problems. Discharge from industries and domestic waste water are some major reasons attributed to
damage done to surface waters and their existing ecosystems (Cooke et al.1993).

2.5.Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program

There has been a tremendous increase in application of Total Maximum Daily Load [ Mandated in the U.S. Clean Water Act
] for managing pollution controls and surface water quality parameters (Chen et al., 1999;Haire et al., 2009). A TMDL refers
to the maximum loading of a pollutant that a water body can receive and still remain in compliance with water quality standards
(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, USEPA, 2003).
With serious threats from water pollution, shift in policy has been observed by the Chinese government. This includes
development of Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) program rather than concentrating only on pollutant concentration
control. ( Jia and Guo, 2012; Wang et al., 2014; Liu et al., 2014).
In recent years, In order to develop the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program , models used are:
 Water quality Assessment Simulation Program (WASP) (Jia et al., 2011; Liang et al., 2015; Xiao et al., 2015)

 Environmental Fluid Dynamics Code (EFDC) (Jia et al., 2010; Zhao et al., 2012)

 Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) (Zheng and Keller, 2008)

 Hydrological Simulation Program Fortran (HSPF) (Bicknell et al., 2005;Fonseca et al., 2014; Göncü and Albek
2010).

Scientific Assessments involve high uncertainties in nature owing to environmental analysis and ecological study. Complex
models with the help of mathematical equations often simulate the fate and transport of pollutants, but with limited
observational data and technological knowledge they are often rendered incompatible. Thus, vigorous assessment of model is
suggested. (Reckhow,1993).
Deterministic methods aligned with risk based analysis can provide a more detailed and comprehensive health assessment of
a catchment (Cibin Raj et. al.,2013; Chaubey and Govindaraju,2014).

HSPF Coupled with PEST (Parameter Estimation Tool) have shown satisfactory results for ungauged basins in China.
However, choosing of calibration objective should be stressed so that significant impact of parameters on the watershed can
be assessed (Gao et.al.,2014).

CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY AND MODEL SET-UP

3.1.Methodology Adopted
The guarantee for sustaining life and social economic development of a country is related to water. India is facing problems
related to water resources such as pollution from external
sources or shortage of water. Thus an attempt to address the above listed problems is made by process of modelling, though
which in its own context proves to be a huge challenge.

In watershed hydrological models which belongs to the domain of hydrological models, simplification of system of a watershed
is carried out to research the relationship between the input factors and the response of a river basin. Thus, by this process we
are able to replace the real hydrological system, simulate and predict the changes to a river basin (Wang et.al.2014).

In order to accurately model water quality within the catchment, it is important to understand the pollution loading to the river.
To this end, my primary goal was to employ a watershed-scale model to characterize the fate and transport of indicator
parameters within the study catchment.

Thus, The steps adopted for the following are:

 Study of Current Catchment Characteristics


 Assessment of Pollution Loads within the catchment

 Different Model Studies and final selection for the catchment

 Development of In stream Water Quality model and it's Calibration

 Assessment for Assimilative capacity based on Water Quality Modelling .
3.4.Model Selection Criteria

3.4.1.Model Type: Water Quality predictive models involve both mathematical expression and expert scientific judgement.
These Includes:

 Mechanistic (Process-Based) Models


 Statistical (Data-Based) Models

They should serve as a bridge between options that can be managed and the associated response variables. They should
encompass the entire link from stress variables to response variables. Mechanistic models should be consistent with scientific
theories.

Water Quality Models are also classified as:

 Pollutant Loading

 Pollutant Response

Pollutant loading models involve predicting the pollutant loads from land use and pollutant (Point Sources) discharges.
Whereas, Pollutant response predicts concentrations of pollutant and their responses in a water body. Uncertainties involved
in model prediction should be documented which provides an estimate of the risk of options involved with the stakeholder.

3.4.2.Data and Complexity of Problem: Water Quality Management Models should be able to address complex problems
with the obtained data. Sometimes elementary problems can be addressed with elementary models whereas on the other hand,
Compounded water quality problems may require models having complex architecture. On the contrary, some models require
large amount of data for monitoring. Hence such models should not used where data availability is scarce. Lastly, Based on
new research and with availability of new monitoring data models are to flexible enough to accommodate updates and
improvements (Reckhow 1994; Chithra et al. 2013).
3.4.3.Role of Stakeholder: Stakeholders play a major role in decision processes involved with water management. They need
to understand and accept the criteria being laid for the model being used. Finally, The cost involved with updating and
maintaining the model should be taken into account.

3.4.4.Uncertainty in Modelling: For management of water quality , the primary purpose of modelling is to support decision
- making on the basis of monitoring data. To achieve this objective, priority placement on descriptions of processes may lead
to development of a complex mechanistic model or sometimes a over simple or a empirical model. Sometimes unnecessarily
costly analysis can cause hindrances in effective decision making. In addition to this, Various chemical , physical , and
biological processes in aquatic and terrestrial environments are very complex to model even in the most sophisticated models.

Five potential models were identified which meet these criteria: the Storm Water Management Model (SWMM) (Huber and
Dickinson, 1992), the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) (Neitsch et al., 2005), QUAL 2k, AQUATOX and the Better
Assessment Science Integrating point and Nonpoint Sources/Hydrologic Simulation Program-FORTRAN (BASINS/HSPF)
(USEPA, 2001). All of these models are available freely from the U.S. EPA. Also, MIKE 11 by DHI
(Water/Environment/Health), Denmark was also considered.

3.5.Model Used

After consideration of the advantages and disadvantages of each of the potential models, I decided to utilize BASINS/HSPF
to model the fate and transport of indicator parameters within study Area. SWMM does not have an integrated component for
modelling. Additionally, and one of my objectives in completing this thesis was to apply a model from start to finish. Applying
SWMM, Aquatox and WASP would not have met this learning objective. Besides, MIKE 11 is not available as a free software
which would have caused further difficulties during modelling regarding licenses issues. BASINS seems overly complex for
the objectives of this study. But, as no one has applied the model previously on the catchment so it seemed to be a rightful task
for learning process.

3. 6. BASINS Development

In the year 1998 the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed a platform system in order to meet the requirements
for a comprehensive simulation analysis, The platform came to be known as BASINS(Better Assessment Science Integrating
Point and Non-point Sources Basins )(See Figure 3.1). This system includes an integrated platform, based on the Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) technology and includes HSPF , SWAT , PLOAD , WASP and AGWA hydrological models and
auxiliary tools such as WDMUtil, GenScnge
(Wang & Zhang 2014).BASINS is linked to Arc View, which makes the creation and superposition of the basic data such as
land use, DEM's and river basin networks more convenient. BASINS provide ease in collection and retrieval of data sets for
the HSPF model, which increases efficiency for the model. It assist in watershed management and Total Maximum Daily Load
development by integrating environmental data, analysis tools, and watershed and water quality models.
 Figure 3.1:BASINS System Overview[48]

HSPF (Hydrological Simulation Program - FORTRAN) Model was put forward in the year 1981 by Johanson et al., it
originated in the SWM (Stanford Watershed Model). For a significant amount of time, the environmental protection agency
(EPA) invested it's resources and energy to develop a model which had the ability to predict and simulate the water quality for
the natural riverine systems. HSPF based on the meteorological and hydrological data has been able to succeed in this context
and thereby helps in to prevent disasters.
3.7.The Modelling Process

In order to simulate the processes of study catchment, HSPF involves a number of processes and data which can accurately
reflect the land use, topographical, stream network and utilizes the hydrological and meteorological data and observations to
study and simulate these processes. It involves the unified geographic coordinate system, for a unified projection to all the
datasets involved in the process of simulation. After the process of simulation is over, the model requires some parameters to
be adjusted or 'tune' the model in order to get the required results in the optimum range.

3.8.The Data Processing

Initial Process involves creation or loading of stream network files and fundamental data such as DEM, Land Use Data, Hydro-
Meteorological data sets on the BASINS Platform This step promotes automatic division of catchment and helps dividing the
catchment into segments. This in turn also gives Subbasins and outlet sites. Now we switch over to HSPF Model , (See Figure
3.2). which in turn activates the subbasin layers and other basic elements for the model network diagram and helps in generating
the default model parameters required for the simulation. Lastly, We decide the simulation period and run the simulation and
then try to compare it with the observed data.
 Figure 3.2:The HSPF Model Development [46]

3.9. Watershed Delineation

Watershed represents an area of land draining into a stream or a water course at a given location. It provides the boundaries of
the study area, and/or to divide the study area into sub-areas or segments. Flow is modelled from subbasin to subbasin until it
reaches an outlet point. The flow out of a subbasin is determined by a mass (water) balance: Flow out = Flow from contributing
subbasins + precipitation - evapotranspiration - infiltration + groundwater discharge to drainage network. The composition of
the flow leaving a particular subbasin is also determined by a mass balance: Load out = Loading from contributing subbasins
+ runoff loading from within subbasin - decay + growth.

BASINS has a built-in "Automatic Watershed Delineation" tool that allows the user to graphically delineate the watershed and
corresponding subbasins. The user first inputs a Digital Elevation Map (DEM) file in ESRI GRID format. By downloading
this DEM (Digital Elevation Model) from Land Processes Distributed Active Archive Centre (LP DAAC) with a resolution of
30 meters . Inputs for the stream file and providing the places of outlets to be monitored was also done for these known features.
Doing this helps to ensure that the watershed delineator places streams as accurately as possible.

The "Automatic Watershed Delineation" generates predictions of stream locations within the model by using multiple pre-
defined GIS files: the DEM (elevation data), a mask (another GRID file indicating the extent of the watershed), and a stream
shape file containing locations of known streams (streams, in this case). BASINS also takes into account a threshold drainage
area, which essentially defines the resolution of the watershed delineation and stream generation. After generating streams,
the input for the locations of point sources within the catchment was done. The next step is to identify "Whole Watershed
Outlets." Whole watershed outlets are points through which all water leaving the basin drains. Thus selection of these points
as the endpoints of streams discharging directly into the reservoir was done. BASINS then generated the watershed and
subbasin boundaries. Each stream segment has its own subbasin and all subbasins are contained within the watershed
boundary. See Figure 3.3 for the completed watershed delineation.
Figure 3.3:Delineated Watersheds with their Outlets

Page | 35
3.10.Weather Data Management (WDM) File

The file has weather, input, output, calibration, and other time series data required by HSPF.
A WDM file may contain a large number of time series data. HSPF can manipulate (i.e., read,
replace) the data contained in a WDM file.

As mentioned earlier, after acquiring the data sets required we need to Re-Format the data sets in required forms. Thus,
Rearranging the data sets in a chronological order and Aggregate/Disaggregate as and when required. The Steps required are
shown in Figure 3.4. Also the setup of a WDM file for the project is depicted in Figure 3.5.

Functionalities for Time Series Management Include:

 Create/delete

 Import/export

 Update

 Fill-in

 Extend

 Generate

 Aggregate/disaggregate

 Mathematical operations

View/Edit

 Save to text file


 Specify date and number formats

 Edit time series attributes

 Edit specific values

 Save to new/ overwrite time series

Graph

 Specify display period (dynamically)


 Edit title, axes, legend

 Edit curve markers, colours

 Use left, right, auxiliary axes

 Arithmetic and logarithmic plots
Figure 3.4:Processing of Meteorological Data in BASINS-HSPF[61]

Figure 3.5:Setting Up of a WDM File

Page | 37
3.11.Weather Data Computations

In order to model successfully the hydrological flow BASINS require certain data for the study catchment in consideration.
The Data Required for Model Setup are:

 Precipitation

 Potential evapotranspiration

 Air temperature

 Solar radiation

 Wind Speed

 Dewpoint Temperature

 Cloud Cover

Having acquired all of the above data from Global Land Data Assimilation System (GLDAS) Data Products provided by
NASA, After acquiring the data calculation as well as cross referencing the following data from local available stations
(Roorkee, Haridwar, Dehradun, Bijnor, Najijabad & Meerut) was done. Calculations done for Air Temperature Calculation
for Station (x1033y 356 28.8750, 78.1250) are shown in Figure 3.6 and the corresponding graph is shown in Figure 3.7.
Functions of Various Data Sets:
Precipitation Data Sets

The uses for Precipitation Data Sets include:

 Primary input for soil hydrology


 Surface runoff is directly dependent on precipitation

 Pollutant transport caused by overland flow and soil erosion Potential

Evapotranspiration Data Sets


The uses for Potential Evapotranspiration Data Sets include:

 Main Constituent for Hydrologic Processes

Correlates Solar Radiation, Air Temperature (Min. & Max. Data Sets) and Wind Speed Data Sets
Air Temperature Data Sets

The uses for Air Temperature Data Sets include:

 Function of elevation

 Temperature corrected for elevation by calculating difference between the weather station elevation and the
model segment mean elevation.

 Water Temperature for Conductive-convective heat transport.

Solar Radiation Data Sets

The uses for Solar Radiation Data Sets include:

 Heat Balance in water Bodies


 Bacteria/Plankton Growth Rate in Water Bodies

Wind Speed Data Sets

The uses for Wind Speed Data Sets include:

 Heat Balance in Water Bodies

Evaporative heat loss increases with wind speed

Conductive-convective heat transfer between air and water is a function of wind speed
 Oxygen Reaeration Rate

Lake reaeration rate is a function of wind speed

 Chemical volatilization rate
Proportional to oxygen reaeration coefficient

Dewpoint Temperature Data Sets

The uses for Dewpoint Temperature Data Sets include:

 Heat Balances for Water Bodies Cloud

Cover Data Sets


The uses for Cloud Cover Data Sets include:


 Cloud Cover affects long wave radiation balance which accounts for heat balance in water bodies.

 In Photolysis, Cloud Cover decreases photolyzing radiation.
Figure 3.6:Air Temperature Calculation for Station (x1033y 356 28.8750, 78.1250)

Figure 3.7:Graph Generated by Air Temperature Calculation for Station (x1033 y356 28.8750,
78.1250)
3.12. Operational Aspects of HSPF

Hydrological Simulation Program Fortran (HSPF) contains set of modules which permits continuous and comprehensive
simulation of various hydrological and water quality processes. HSPF's core model incorporates hierarchical program
subroutines which perform specific tasks during the execution of the program. Thus, the modular design of the program
increases the importance of the model, Which allows HSPF to be applicable for special applications as and when required by
the user. Also, it allows users for replacement or addition of Modules as and when required. Figure 3.8 shows the integration
of GIS with HSPF's core model and how the results are linked with the post processing. Correspondingly, For the project UCI
File (Figure 3.9 ) and then followed by HSPF Model Setup (Figure 3.10) is shown below.

Figure 3.8:Integration of various HSPF Programs[51]

HSPF Supporting Programs

WinHSPF
 Interactive interface to HSPF
 Access to all HSPF Features
 Scenario development

Page | 41
BASINS
 Build/maintain WDM time series file and met data
 Meteorologic data generation and fill-in
 Time series data in graphical and tabular form
  Output postprocessor
 Hydrologic calibration support (scripts)

HSPEXP + (New Version)

 Hydrologic Calibration Support

Files Utilised by HSPF

 UCI (User’s Control Input) – contains all input except time series data

 Run Interpreter Output (MES, ECH) – output summary of user’s input

 Operation Module Output – state variables and fluxes at user-selected intervals

 WDM or DSS – Time series data input and output (binary format)

 PLTGEN/MUTSIN/SEQ – Time series data input and output (text format)

 HSPF Binary Output – Operation output in binary format

HSPF Operation

 Run Interpreter processes input, “echoing” it back to the user as it goes. The amount of output to the “echo
file” is controlled by a flag in the input.

 Warning and error messages that occur during both the interpretation and execution phases appear in the “echo
file”.

 If the Run Interpreter detects errors in the input, HSPF will attempt to complete as much of the interpretation as
possible and then stop without executing the run. Warnings do not stop execution.

 If too many errors occur during the run, HSPF will halt execution and place a message in the “echo file”.
Figure 3.9:UCI File Creation and input of other files for the Project

Figure 3.10:WinHSPF Model Setup for the Project

Page | 43
3.13. HSPEXP +

HSPEXP+ is an expert system which allows the users to make changes in the User Control Input (UCI) file for the WinHSPF,
run simulations and generate output reports for the hydrology outputs and their comparison to observed values, Also advice
from experts to the users so as stress on parameters which shall be required to modify in order to improve the calibration.
Conclusively, it is an interactive process that requires repeating the process of simulations, generation of statistical reports and
graphs, getting advices and modifying parameters.

Steps involved for HSPEXP + :

1.Develop HSPF Model (User Control Input File).

2.Set up HSPF model to generate hydrology calibration time series at the calibration location (using WinHSPF).

3.Prepare *.exs file (BASINS specification File).

4. Run HSPEXP+ and generate the Reports and Graphs as well as expert system advice reports and then run calibration.

In general, use of HSPEXP+ involves an interactive process that requires repeating the cycle of simulation, computing
statistics, reviewing plots, getting advice, and modifying parameters.

HSPEXP+ employs over 35 rules involving over 80 conditions to recommend parameter adjustments. The rules are divided
into four groups, seasonal flows, storm flows, annual volumes, and low flows.

For outputs statistical tables comparing observed and simulated flows, graphical representations of various parameters and
tables based on advices for parameters are prepared Time-Series files are stored in a WDM file format. All the outputs can be
viewed or written interactively with the help of a spreadsheet program.

Figure 3.10 represents the HSPEXP+ interface used for the project to generate reports.Page | 44
Figure 3.11:HSPEXP+ Interface

Page | 45
3.15. Water Quality Parameters Loading and Modelling

The main spirit in water quality modelling for a catchment is to get a definite relationship between the simulated and the
observed concentrations, while maintaining the instream quality parameters well within physical reach. However, Availability
of parameters and there suitability also require attention.

In the context of water quality modelling, the purpose is to simulate the primary processes which determine the dissolved
oxygen concentration in a reach or mixed reservoir. Dissolved oxygen is an parameter which indicates the overall well being
of lakes or streams and the associated existing ecology of the water body. In relatively unpolluted water body systems the
balance between the sources of pollution and there sinks are balanced and the value remains closer to optimum. On the
contrary, when a stream starts receiving heavy pollution loads it is unable to establish the balance, also bacterial culture
predominates and significant reduction in the value of dissolved oxygen results. (O'Connor and DiToro, 1970).

The figure 3.13 below illustrate the movement and sinks modelled in this subroutine group. In order to account for time
dependent variations in oxygen balance, variables representing different states for both dissolved oxygen and biochemical
oxygen demand must be maintained. The DOX state variable represents the oxygen dissolved in water and immediately
available to satisfy the oxygen requirements of the system. The BOD state variable represents the total quantity of oxygen
required to satisfy the first-stage (carbonaceous) biochemical oxygen demand of dead nonrefractory organic materials in the
water.Page | 48
Figure 3.15:Diagram for dissolved oxygen in the OXRX subroutine group of the RCHRES Application Module [51]

The following processes are used by subroutine OXRX for determining oxygen balance:

1. Longitudinal advection of DOX and BOD

2. Sinking of BOD material

3. Benthal oxygen demand

4. Benthal release of BOD material

5. Reaeration

6. Oxygen depletion due to decay of BOD materials

Page | 49
 CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

4.1. Watershed Characterization Report

The BASINS Watershed Characterization System can be used to select and generate several standard reports designed to
describe the physical characteristics of watersheds (subbasins) you have defined. This feature is more customized version of
the Watershed Characterization Reports. All reports require that a subbasins layer be defined in advance. In addition, each
report has its own unique set of required layers (e.g., the Landuse Characterization report requires that a land use grid or shape
file be loaded and identified). Default layer and field names are automatically assigned the first time you use WCS; settings
are stored in a separate data file along with the BASINS project data files.

Figure 4.1:BASINS Watershed Characterization System Report

Characterization based on land use is been presented here in figure 4.1, a more detailed land use characterization based on Sub
Basins layer is also carried out which is shown in appendix. The report was generated into an HTML-formatted file which is
displayed on the Results tab in BASINS 4.1.

Page | 50
4.3. Simulated Flow Results

After the successful model setup i.e., creation of T_P.uci file was completed. Files required to Run HSPEXP+ were created,
for this T_P.exs file was written along with T_P.wdm was created to store the desired output. However, significant difference
is observed between the observed flow obtained by means of literature study at Haridwar and the simulated flow obtained
from HSPF. The reason is attributed to the reason that in the present study, stretch of a River is considered whereas, for perfect
analysis a watershed should be chosen, but as no industries are present above the upstream of Haridwar. The purpose of study
for Water Quality Modelling would not have been satisfied. Hence, Some error within permissible limits is been taken into
account for modelling of water quality and other parameters as well. As shown in Fig. 4.4, The flow simulated at RCHRES 3
(Haridwar) is well within limits till 10,000 cusecs (which is average flow). However, above this discharge the error is increased
as during the rainfall season the quantum of discharge in the river increases and the study catchment is not able to account for
the rains occurring in the hills which tend to increase the discharge in the stream.

Page | 53
 Figure 4.4:Error observed with simulating discharge at RCHRES3(Haridwar)

4.4. Simulated Dissolved Oxygen Results

To simulate dissolved oxygen OXRX application module from the RCHRES subroutine group is used. GQUAL helps to obtain
the oxygen reaeration coefficient (KOREA) in order to obtain the volatilization rates for quality constituents, However it may
recall OXREA for oxygen reaeration coefficient (KOREA) but the change in dissolved oxygen due to reaeration is calculated
in OXRX rather than OXREA.
The equation for reaerationDOX=DOXSis(Equation+KOREA4):x SATDO − DOXS
.....(4)
DOXWhere,= Dissolved oxygen concentration after reaeration mg/l
DOXS = Dissolved oxygen concentration at start of interval mg/l KOREA = Reaeration
coefficient calculated in OXREA
SATDO = Saturated concentration of dissolved oxygen mg/l
Page | 54
The saturation concentration of dissolved oxygen is computed at prevalent atmospheric conditions by the equation
(Equation 5):

SATDO = (14.652 + TW x(-0.41022 + TW x(0.007991 - 0.7777E-4xTW))) x CFPRES

.....(5)

Where:

= Saturated concentration of dissolved oxygen mg/l

SATDO

TW = Water temperature deg C

CFPRES = Ratio of site pressure to sea level pressure

(CFPRES is calculated by the Run Interpreter dependent upon mean elevation of RCHRES)

Using the above stated equations, Dissolved oxygen is been simulated for the simulation period for places Haridwar and
Garhmukteshwar. Simulations are shown in Figure 4.5 for Haridwar and Figure 4.6 for Garhmukhteshwar. The difference
between Simulated and Observed Dissolved Oxygen is presented in Table 4.2 for Haridwar and in Table 4.3 for
Garhmukhteshwar. For more detailed analysis on Simulated results, Box and Whisker plot (Figure 4.7) is prepared using R-
Language a powerful statistical tool and the summary of the plot is presented in Table 4.4 for both the locations viz., Haridwar
and Garhmukhteshwar.

Page | 55
 Figure 4.5:Simulated Dissolved Oxygen at Haridwar

Table 4.2.: Simulated and Observed Dissolved Oxygen at Haridwar

Year Simulated Observed Difference

Dissolved Oxygen Dissolved Oxygen %
(mg/lt.) (mg/lt.)
2012 6.25 6.7 6.71
2013 6.07 6.7 9.40
2014 6.22 6.7 7.20
2015 6.40 6.7 4.45

Page | 56
 Figure 4.6:Simulated Dissolved Oxygen at Garhmukteshwar

Table 4.3.: Simulated and Observed Dissolved Oxygen at Garhmukhteshwar

Year Simulated Observed Difference

Dissolved Oxygen Dissolved Oxygen %
(mg/lt.) (mg/lt.)
2012 7.92 8.1 2.22
2013 7.68 8.1 5.18
2014 7.75 8.1 4.32
2015 7.86 8.1 2.96

Page | 57
Figure 4.7:Box and Whisker Plots for Dissolved Oxygen at Haridwar and Garhmukhteshwar

Table 4.4.: Summary for Dissolved Oxygen Data Set [61]

Place Haridwar Garhmukhteshwar

Minimum 4.348 4.978
I Quartile 5.283 6.578
Median 6.218 7.345
Mean 6.313 7.743
III Quartile 7.295 8.935
Maximum 8.373 10.211

4.5. Assessment of Assimilative Capacity

Efforts are made to revive the assimilative capacity of a river, also the parameters governing it should be taken into account
so as to establish a benchmark value for the stream to assess their health. Very Often dissolved oxygen is used in context with
natural waters as it gives an indication of the living species surviving in the river. Thus, Assimilative capacity has become
synonymous to dissolved oxygen degradation or replenishment along the course of the stream.

The major physical processes involved in self-purification of watercourses are dilution, sedimentation and resuspension ,
filtration, gas transfer, and heat transfer.

As per the principle of mass balance, the capacity for dilution of a stream can be calculated. If the volumetric discharge rate
and the concentration of the concerned material can be estimated for both waste effluent and the stream, the concentration
after mixing can be estimated as per Equation 6 (Peavy and Rowe,1985):

Page | 58
 CsQs + CwQw = QmCm
.....(6)
CWhere,=Concentration Mass/Volume of the material in study,
Q = Volumetric discharge rate Volume/Time ,
and the subscripts s, w and m designate stream, waste and mixture conditions.
For Haridwar,
Total Treatment Capacity installed = 45 MLD (Qs)
Average Annual Flow Present in River Ganges = 66.5 MLD (Qw) Average Dissolved
Oxygen (Simulated) = 6.25 mg/lt. (Cw)
Min. Dissolved Oxygen required as per "Class B" = 5 mg/lt. (C m)
Hence, Total Discharge in the River after Discharge from STP = 111.5 MLD (Qm )

Now Using Equation 6, Cs is calculated as,

Cs = [(111.5 x 5) - (66.5 x 6.25)] / 45

Cs = 3.15 mg/lt.

Thus, The Min. requirement for the Sewage treatment plants to maintain the required parameters in the river after discharging
it's effluent with special reference to dissolved oxygen is 3.15 mg/lt.

Page | 59
 CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS

5.1.Conclusion

The catchment area for the river Ganga from Haridwar to Garhmukteshwar is about 5590 sq. km. Population in the catchment
is about 37.6 lakh, which comprises of 10.85 lakh urban and 26.75 lakh rural respectively. The total amount of waste generation
from the catchment is about 230 MLD, which can be further classified into as, 117 MLD from Urban areas and 86 MLD from
the Rural areas and about 20 MLD of Industrial waste from various industries located in the catchment area. There are about
seven small drains located into various sub-catchments within the study stretch. The drains present in the catchment are Solani
drain (825 km2), Baia drain (629 km2), Malin drain (584 km2), Chhoiya drain (365 km2), Haridwar drain (320 km2), Garh drain
(119 km2), Laksar drain (75 km2). Among these, Chhoiya drain is found to be severely polluted.

Relevant Model studies of Models like SWMM (Storm Water Management Model), WASP (Water Quality Analysis
Simulation Program), SWAT ( The Soil and Water Assessment Tool), BASINS (Better Assessment Science Integrating Point
and Nonpoint Sources), HSPF (Hydrological Simulation Program - FORTRAN), AQUATOX, QUAL 2K, And MIKE 11.
Among these models BASINS/HSPF were chosen for Water Quality Modelling for the study stretch.

Based on model development and analysis of time-series data following conclusions can be made:

 Cropland comprises 62.12% of Catchment Area and Deciduous Broadleaf Forest comprises of 21.50% of Catchment
Area. Urban area occupies only 1.15% of the catchment area but yet plays an important role in generation of pollution
loads. Significant Portion of Catchment lies in Wetlands 6.29% of Catchment Area, which gives an area of
conservation for biodiversity from the increasing threat of pollution.

 Spatial variation of PET (Potential Evapo-Transpiration) over the catchment ranges from 3.29 inches to 5.48 inches
and which gave an difference of 5.91%.Which signifies that the model is of significantly high accuracy. (Difference
Should be <10% as per HSPF Manual).

Page | 60
  Mean Dissolved Oxygen for Haridwar is 6.21 mg/lt. and for Garhmukteshwar is 7.345 mg/lt. which is in fair
accordance with the observed data available in literature study. Also, The difference in observed and simulated
Dissolved Oxygen is quite low for Haridwar (~9.40%) and for Garhmukhteshwar (~5.18%).

 Assessment for assimilative capacity at Haridwar revealed that 3.12 mg/lt. of dissolved oxygen should be present in
the effluent in order to satisfy the Class B Norms for designated use.